How common a disease is doesn't have much to do with treatment efforts. Cystic Fibrosis has practically been cured by Big Pharma and only ~40,000 people in the entire US have it.
I just would like to say that it's not capitalism that decides if money is invested in a disease or another but just the individuals operating freely in the market. On the other hand Capitalism has been actually the main driver for the massive investments that enable the expensive research in biomedical topics.
It’s unfortunately normal that conditions with very low prevalence, receive less private investment than diseases that affect millions of people. That’s not because of a moral failing of capitalism, but a result of free market and the free decision of the population on where to allocate their resources. Imposing anything else on people would actually be the real moral failing, because what is the right allocation of resources between technological development, investments about hunger, medical development or just leisure? Let each individual decide for themselves and of course feel free to convince anyone to invest in what you consider priority.
So I think the fairest system is the one where individuals remain free to choose how to invest their time and money, while society as a whole can still decide, for example through philanthropy, to give extra support to areas some areas like rare diseases.
Said that, if you know of any organization supporting HD research that deserves any type of donation please let us know here so we can support it voluntarily.
As an aside because I'm pedantic about the language, apostrophes are never used to show pluralism.
in Dutch they are for some words, e.g., 1 ski, 2 ski's. i have no idea how that arose historically.
If we're trying to figure out what the most benefit for each taxpayer dollar is, then a rare disease won't win out over, say, cancer research.
Someone may consider researching a rare disease as "waste," even though to everyone including the previous poster who is a widow because of HD, it is far from a waste.
When there is not much of a profit motive to do something - whether going to the moon or fighting a rare disease - public money is the best way to do it. And even throwing a fairly small percentage at it can create big achievements.
And that's one reason I'd like to see how much money and time went into this. We might be surprised that it's fairly small in the grand scheme of biomedical research costs!
Mind your p's and q's.
Source: Chicago Manual of Style, 14th edition, section 6.82. Also see section 6.77: Tim had had enough of her "maybe's."